Case Digest (G.R. No. L-59603)
Facts:
Export Processing Zone Authority v. Hon. Ceferino E. Dulay, G.R. No. 59603, April 29, 1987, the Supreme Court En Banc, Gutierrez, Jr., J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Export Processing Zone Authority (EPZA) sought to establish the Mactan Export Processing Zone; by Proclamation No. 1811 (Jan. 15, 1979) certain lands in Lapu‑Lapu City were reserved for that purpose. The proclamation included four parcels (aggregate ~22,328 sq.m.) that were privately owned and registered in the name of respondent San Antonio Development Corporation. EPZA offered to buy the parcels under the valuation scheme of P.D. No. 464 (Sec. 92), but the parties could not agree.
EPZA filed an expropriation complaint under P.D. No. 66 (as amended) in the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Cebu, Branch XVI, Lapu‑Lapu City, praying also for a writ of possession; a writ issued Oct. 21, 1980, and respondent answered Dec. 23, 1980. At pretrial (Feb. 13, 1981) the parties agreed the only issue was just compensation; on Feb. 17, 1981 the trial judge issued an order of condemnation and appointed commissioners under Rule 67, Sections 5–8, to ascertain just compensation.
The commissioners’ consolidated report (June 19, 1981) recommended P15.00 per square meter. Petitioner moved for reconsideration (July 29, 1981) and objected to the commissioners’ report, asserting that P.D. No. 1533 (and earlier P.D.s 76, 464, 794) had superseded Sections 5–8 of Rule 67 by making the owner’s or assessor’s declared market value (whichever is lower) the exclusive basis for just compensation. The trial court denied reconsideration (Nov. 14, 1981) and set the commissioners’ report for hearing.
Petitioner then filed this petition for certiorari and mandamus with preliminary restraining order in the Supreme Court (Feb. 9, 1982), contending the trial judge acted with grave abuse of discretion by proceeding with commissioners under a decree that, petitioner claimed, eliminated the court’s discretion to determine just ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Were Sections 5 to 8 of Rule 67 of the Revised Rules of Court repealed or amended by Presidential Decrees Nos. 76, 464, 794 and 1533 so that courts are precluded from appointing commissioners to determine just compensation?
- If not, is the exclusive and mandatory mode of determining just compensation prescribed by P.D. No. 1533 (i.e., the lower of owner’s declared value or assessor’s val...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)